Less than a month into his new cabinet, four of Prime Minister Mark Carney’s key ministers have flip-flopped on national policy questions, the latest being Justice Minister Sean Fraser. And with a Liberal defeat already on the books in the House of Commons, frequent ministerial backtracking paints a picture of a government struggling to maintain internal discipline.
Despite Liberal government whip Mark Gerretsen insisting nothing went wrong with internal party discipline, the narrow 166–164 loss on Monday suggests otherwise. Even more revealing signs of trouble lie not just in how government MPs are voting, but in what they are saying—and immediately unsaying—on critical policy files.
The most high-profile and consequential reversal came from Justice Minister Sean Fraser yesterday.
As Fraser headed into Tuesday’s Liberal cabinet meeting, Fraser suggested that Indigenous communities do not hold an absolute veto under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), arguing instead for “heightened responsibility” to consult.
“The commentary to date suggests it’s not necessarily a blanket veto power—but of course, we’re in new territory here,” said Fraser. “From my understanding, the concept of a veto stops short of being absolute.”
🚨🚨NEW
— Tablesalt 🇨🇦 (@Tablesalt13) June 3, 2025
MINISTER FRASER SAYS ABORIGINALS DO NOT HAVE A VETO OVER ENERGY PROJECTS
they are going to sideline them
Man!…. From lets bring in millions of immigrants "because its the right thing to do" to "aboriginals? Meh" ….
Poilievre SMACKED the woke out of these guys pic.twitter.com/rZruYCASHp
Fraser’s position immediately triggered a backlash from First Nations leaders—including a call for an apology from Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak.
Less than 24 hours later, Fraser reversed course, apologized, and disavowed his own framing.
“My comments actually caused hurt and potentially eroded a very precarious trust,” he told reporters.
He then explicitly rejected the idea of viewing consultation as adversarial, shifting to emphasize “partnership” and “respect.” However, Fraser provided little to no clarity on whether First Nations actually hold veto power, even as Carney seeks to project enthusiasm for nation-building infrastructure projects, including pipelines.
Things weren’t helped by Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault, whose May 14 statement that Canada should avoid building new pipelines and instead “maximize the use of existing infrastructure” made headlines.
Guilbeault even claimed—incorrectly—that the newly operational Trans Mountain Expansion Project was running at just 40% capacity, a claim contradicted by industry figures and federal data.
Two weeks later, under pressure from industry groups and provincial leaders, Guilbeault disavowed his earlier comments, saying: “I’m not the energy minister. I’m not responsible. I’m responsible for nature.” The comment was flippant, but telling—he appeared to back away not just from his pipeline position, but from any responsibility for national energy conversations altogether.
Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne has also been forced into damage control. In mid-May, analysts with Oxford Economics revealed that the Carney government’s headline-grabbing retaliatory tariffs against U.S. goods had been neutered by a series of exemptions—effectively nullifying their impact.
Champagne followed by insisting Oxford Economics was wrong, claiming that 70% of tariffs remained in place and that exemptions were “temporary” and for “public safety.” Yet those exemptions, worth billions, had been granted in the middle of an election campaign—making the timing and motives hard to ignore.
Champagne is sticking by his story to this day.
The flip-flops extend to day zero for Carney’s cabinet. Housing Minister Gregor Robertson also stumbled badly when asked directly whether Canadian home prices should come down. “No,” he answered bluntly—an astonishing statement amid a housing crisis, less than a day after Robertson received his appointment.
After an outcry, Robertson quickly backpedalled, posting on X that he misunderstood the question and affirming that homes “should be more affordable.” The explanation did little to reassure Canadians paying record-high mortgage costs or trying to enter the market for the first time.
Carney himself didn’t help matters. When asked just days later in Rome whether home prices should fall, the prime minister dodged the question entirely, saying it “depends on the timeframe and the specific type of housing.” Shortly thereafter, his housing mandate letter to cabinet made affordability a priority.
Carney’s first foray into governance has been riddled with struggles to maintain a change of tone and one unified voice. His cabinet ministers have taken to making bold high-profile statements, walking them back under likely internal pressure, or contradicting one another outright.
